erinys_distill

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing side effects, whether the operation is a read or write, and what happens to the original observation. 'Distill' implies a transformation, but there is no mention of mutating state, creating new records, or reversibility. The description is entirely silent on these behavioral traits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single short sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks structured detail about inputs, outputs, or purpose nuances, so the brevity is a deficiency rather than an asset.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having an output schema, the tool description provides no information about what the distillation produces or how it integrates with the broader tool set. With only two parameters, no annotations, and no description-level detail, the description is inadequate for an agent to invoke the tool correctly in most contexts.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining what the parameters mean. It does not mention 'observation_id' or 'level' at all, nor does it explain the meaning of the default 'abstract' level. The parameter semantics are entirely left to inference from the schema names, which is insufficient for an agent to choose correct values.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Distill') and resource ('observation'), indicating it transforms an observation into a higher abstraction level. However, the phrase 'higher abstraction level' is vague and does not clarify what the output represents or how this differs from sibling tools like erinys_reinforce or erinys_supersede.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any preconditions, exclusions, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate, leaving the agent without contextual decision-making information.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.